Remote viewing targets

User avatar
VisionFromFeeling
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:21 pm

Remote viewing targets

Post by VisionFromFeeling »

Hello Skeptics,

Would you like to help me by setting up targets for me to remote view? All you need is to choose a photograph of a target, preferably from a creative commons source such as https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page or https://unsplash.com/. Create a new random target number of the format 1234-5678 for the target with any random number generator of your choice or generate one here https://farsight.org/SRV/SRVcoordinates.html

A target can be a location, person, building, object, event, or anything else. Target pictures that show a large region are easier to remote view than target pictures depicting just a closeup of a small object. Target pictures containing something unusual, such as unusual architecture, or something extreme such as extreme temperature or an explosion, are easier to remote view than a boring target.

The picture must be a color photograph, and it cannot be,
-black and white
-drawing
-photograph of a painting
-digitally edited
-cutout image against a fake background or greenscreen background

Save the picture on your computer and give it the file name which is its target number.

Post the target number here together with the date and time and your time zone when you created the target. Example,

Target 5631-7438
created August 15 2019 at 10:45 PM CEST

Do not say anything else in the post that has the target number and date time stamp, not even "have fun" or "this one will be interesting" or "this is a scary one" or "good luck" because anything else given whether clues about the target or not will throw me off.

I will remote view the target and create a report consisting of a text and a drawing and submit that report here. Once I have submitted my report here, you will then post the feedback. The feedback consists of writing "feedback" at the top, then the target number again, the same date and time stamp again, the actual target picture or a link to the target picture, and a link to the target picture if not already stated. Example,

Feedback
Target 5631-7438
created August 15 2019 at 10:45 PM CEST
Image
Image source https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... Greece.jpg

chaggle
Posts: 2584
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:01 am

Re: Remote viewing targets

Post by chaggle »

Hello Anita - nice to see you. :thumb:

Bedtime here - will have a look at your post in the morning.
Don't blame me - I voted remain :con

chaggle
Posts: 2584
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:01 am

Re: Remote viewing targets

Post by chaggle »

1275-1934
created August 18 2019 at 2:59 PM BST
Don't blame me - I voted remain :con

Matt
Posts: 976
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:50 pm

Re: Remote viewing targets

Post by Matt »

Hi Anita,

If you'd like to post your protocol, how many targets you anticipate gathering how you'll be selecting targets, where you'll be announcing the coded target list prior to making your reports, how reports will be judged and what would be considered a successful demonstration of your abilities then I'd be happy to join in.

However I won't contribute to a loosely defined experiment open to wilful misinterpretation by simply cherry picking results after the fact.

Matt

chaggle
Posts: 2584
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:01 am

Re: Remote viewing targets

Post by chaggle »

Well said Matt.

I'm just seeing it as a bit of fun - not to be taken at all seriously.
Don't blame me - I voted remain :con

Matt
Posts: 976
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:50 pm

Re: Remote viewing targets

Post by Matt »

Thanks Chaggle. Should add, no criticism implied towards anyone who's happy to play along. Just a personal choice to place a few preconditions,

User avatar
bindeweede
Site Admin
Posts: 3771
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 3:45 pm
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

Re: Remote viewing targets

Post by bindeweede »

I don't know if Anita will return, so I've decided to post a link to a thread she started on The Skeptics Society Forum just over one week ago. Thanks to Ketchup for sending it to me.

https://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=31722

chaggle
Posts: 2584
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:01 am

Re: Remote viewing targets

Post by chaggle »

Just read through that link - worth a look.

No surprises.

Anita posts a long and rambling report containing many descriptions of varied events and images.

Anita posts a picture containing about 10ish varied images.

OP posts the picture which bears no relation to anything Anita has posted.

Anita scores herself a C out of A to F. :roll:
Don't blame me - I voted remain :con

User avatar
VisionFromFeeling
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:21 pm

Re: Remote viewing targets

Post by VisionFromFeeling »

Target 1275-1934
created August 18 2019 at 2:59 PM BST

Summary session text report given here to verify it, since a PDF file could be edited simply by uploading a new one:
1275-1934 Summary

Summary:

When writing a summary of a remote viewing session, it is good to avoid using specific labels and names for what things are. An orange might be a tennis ball or a billiard ball if we have not retrieved all the descriptors that are required to tell them apart, to probe the element if it is juicy inside, hairy on the outside, or hard and solid and shiny, then to grab for the nearest label or name for what a thing is could be the wrong name out of a large variety of possible options. That is why remote viewers are advised to produce a session summary which focuses on describing, but not saying with definite labels or names what they think things are.

But in this session the theme and names of things is very clear and wants to be named. In this session it was impossible for me to write this summary with using only descriptors, even though I have tried.

The main element of most importance is a dark-green area on the ground or floor. This is inside of a room that I have called a hideout, because the walls are nearby, it is a small square shaped room space which is dark with black and brown colors, and from the people in this hideout room there is a sense and a feeling that we are hiding from other people who are outside of this hideout.

One of the walls of the hideout, into-page in the drawing, consists of seaweed-shaped strips like fabric which connect together to form a hanging blanket or canvas which has many holes throughout it, the colors of it are beige and dark-green, it really resembles a military Army camouflage throw which is used to cover and conceal vehicles or other things by making it look like leaf coverage from a vantage point above.

The hideout is part of an underground system of tunnels similar to being down in the sewers. These tunnels consist of perfect cylindrical pipes, meaning that they do not have a flat floor on their bottom but are round pipe-shaped also on their bottom. A narrow stream of liquid, possibly water, flows slowly along the bottom of at least one of these pipe tunnels. These tunnels are large enough for people to run through them. They form an underground habitat of pipe-shaped tunnels, which has not been fitted to be homely, it is just a rugged place. There are ladders that lead up to the ceiling of the pipe at least in one place, and the ladder leads up to a manhole, a round entrance and exit point, through which one could get up on top of the ground outside.

The dark-green large stain or puddle or spot on the ground in the hideout room is the central element, meaning that what is on it, is of most significance to the target identity. On it is something disgusting and unpleasant which has a bitter and metallic taste.

There is a man kneeling over that dark-green spot. He has blonde hair and is a young man, he could be around 17 years old. He pays attention to that which is on the ground, he is unwilling to leave it behind. He feels responsible for it, and he wishes that he could figure out a way to deal with it or to fix it or to undo what happened there. What is there on the ground is that something happened which should not have happened, similar to that something became broken, it has also felt like a murder scene with a casualty victim, the blonde man feels helpless before it and wishes that he knew how to fix it and mend it and to make it undone. He is also looking several times toward the outside of this hideout because he knows there are people there on the other side of the screen wall.

What I find on this site on the ground in the hideout is a black round bowl which appears to be a hard black round helmet worn by camouflaged Army troops. The troops that wear this round black helmet have their faces painted in black and dark-green splotches of camouflage paint. They wear dark clothes and their jackets are made out of a coarse rough strong fabric similar to jeans but even tougher and harder. The camouflaged men each have a black item in their hands which by all means resembles a machine gun with a long barrel that they point at other people and aim, consistent with the use of a rifle or large gun. Bullets and gunshot wounds have also been detected at this target site, which is further indication that these items could be guns.

A man has been injured, he was wearing the round black helmet and camouflage paint on his face. He is lying on the green spot on the ground, and the blonde man who seems to be his friend is squatting on the ground before him, wishing that he could repair the man and undo the damage but he does not know how. What I have also seen is that this man's face was blown off, the nose missing, parts of brain exposed and blown off. I have also seen that one of his legs was broken, with the broken sharp ends of the lower leg bone exposed out from his leg and exposed flesh around it. Other men from outside the hideout, they are wearing dark clothing, seems like a dark blue color or a medium-gray-blue color, come into the hideout and they put the injured man on a stretcher and carry him away. I have also seen a military hospital in a distant location, where injured soldiers rest in beds, several beds in the same large room, and nurses in white folded hats and short-sleeve shirts and short skirts tending to them, a Bible is passed around there in the hospital recovery room but the soldiers mostly like radio or tv.

I have seen that the blonde man used a combat knife to cut the beige strap that holds the helmet of the injured man under his chin, so that he can take the man's helmet off, and that the blonde man is putting chunks of flesh and body parts of the injured man into inside the helmet, so that he can recover and bring the man to another point. The blonde man is also seen dragging an injured or dead body from the hideout spot and along the tunnel to a drop-down site that is further in the tunnel, so that girlfriends and wives of fallen soldiers can have the remains.

The blonde man is squatting in the hideout and he lifts up with his hands a limp hand from the green spot on the ground, however this hand looks like a woman's hand, but this is also the same site where the injured camouflaged man was lying.

A truck like a jeep delivers more camouflaged soldiers with the round helmets and black machine guns to this site and then the jeep drives away again (this truck drawn as the black box on the drawing).

A military Army tank of beige-golden color has been seen driving slowly on the brown mud field that is above this underground tunnel system and hideout, up out in the open. It too has at one point been covered by the camouflage canvas that has holes throughout it which is made to look like leaf coverage to conceal the Army tank from airplanes above.

The area outside above the underground tunnel system is a field covered in lumpy brown mud. There are lots of men's bodies in the mud, mostly in the mud but with heads and part of arms and legs exposed. The Army tank drives over some of the bodies and an arm bone breaks with the sound of a snap. A brown horse with a man on the horse, this brown horse was also knocked down in the mud by the Army tank that drove by. A red flag was seen on the Army tank perhaps the mostly red Soviet flag, such a red flag was also posted on a short flagpole on top of a building as a marker of conquered grounds.

A German shepherd dog is used by other men to sniff out any survivers from the mud fields.

It feels like world war one or world war two, the theme is very Army and military, not only in labels of things but also in the feel and taste and smell of things. Usually when I get this much detail and this much of a cohesive "story", it is what I call a "false history" which is one of the sources of error in my remote viewing. I have my concerns with this session, this whole Army war theme could be my mind getting carried away with what actual elements "reminds of" or even possibly pulling me to an actual historical scene because the RV mind likes a good story.

However. If we remember to be careful with labeling, what we do have which is reliable, is this:

There is something yucky and disgusting on the ground and a man is squatting before it and he lifts up with his hands a limp hand from that disgusting spot. He wishes that he could repair and undo the damage that was done on that spot, and he is hiding here in the hideout room, and he feels anxious about other men who are outside the hideout. There is a black bowl-shaped object in the blonde man's hands, and the man lifts chunks from the spot on the ground and places those into that bowl-shaped object. There are also black pipe-shaped objects, and there is a horisontally set tunnel in the shape of a long pipe which is connected to this hideout room. It is dark here and unpleasant and there is a bitter and metallic smell.

More details are found in the full report.

Image

Read about how to read my full remote viewing text reports
Here is 1275-1934 Full Report

User avatar
VisionFromFeeling
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:21 pm

Re: Remote viewing targets

Post by VisionFromFeeling »

Thank you chaggle for the target. Now please post the target feedback for 1275-1934.

User avatar
VisionFromFeeling
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:21 pm

Re: Remote viewing targets

Post by VisionFromFeeling »

bindeweede wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 8:37 am
I don't know if Anita will return, so I've decided to post a link to a thread she started on The Skeptics Society Forum just over one week ago. Thanks to Ketchup for sending it to me.
https://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=31722
Thank you for posting the link. I was about to post a link here to that thread in the other forum The Skeptics Society Forum because we are essentially doing the same thing there, as here. I have been trying to find skeptics willing to create remote viewing targets for me for a long time and was not expecting much luck so posting the same inquiry in two places would increase my chances, to my great joy both skeptical forums had members willing to create targets.
chaggle wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 9:56 am
Just read through that link - worth a look.
No surprises.
Anita posts a long and rambling report containing many descriptions of varied events and images.
Anita posts a picture containing about 10ish varied images.
OP posts the picture which bears no relation to anything Anita has posted.
Anita scores herself a C out of A to F. :roll:
The target session you are referring to is the first remote viewing target I did in that other forum. I agree it is not a good session, and the results of it are not supportive or indicative of a remote viewing skill. I would grade that session with either a 'no grade' or with a low C. I agree that that session produced a long and rambling report containing many descriptions of varied events and images. I wrote a more thorough critique of that remote viewing session and results, in a post on that thread. I would suggest that you also take a look at the second target session we did in that other forum, Target 9256-2623 which I would grade with either an A or a B.

Under my normal remote viewing protocol, the grade distribution among a number of targets I mostly did over a year ago, are as follows, the numbers may have improved now one year later if my skill has improved over time and experience, but I still quote to these numbers as they are a grade distribution which I do have available and have computed, these are of course my own subjective qualitative grades based on a comparison of the report to its feedback:
Grade A - 20 - 33%
Grade B - 16 - 26%
Grade C - 19 - 31%
Grade F - 6 - 10%
Matt wrote:
Tue Aug 20, 2019 11:52 pm
Hi Anita,
If you'd like to post your protocol, how many targets you anticipate gathering how you'll be selecting targets, where you'll be announcing the coded target list prior to making your reports, how reports will be judged and what would be considered a successful demonstration of your abilities then I'd be happy to join in.
However I won't contribute to a loosely defined experiment open to wilful misinterpretation by simply cherry picking results after the fact.
Matt
Hello Matt. I thought we would start by first doing some blind targets with open interpretation of the outcome at the end, as that is most of what I have been doing with remote viewing so far. My thoughts were to then proceed to a second step to assess the remote viewing performance in one or both of the following ways:

1. Grading each individual statement in a report summary as being one of three options yes/no/? depending on if it correlates to the target. The ? ones would be disregarded. And a percentage of how many yes from the total of yes and no could be computed. This percent is referred to as the accuracy %. Several sessions could be considered together as a group. Each report would be given an accuracy % not only to its own target, but to the other targets of that group also. Provided that the individual targets in that group of sessions are sufficiently distinct from each other, is the accuracy % greater in reports to their own targets than to the other targets?

2. Provided that targets are sufficiently distinct from one another, could an independent third party judge match my summary report and drawing to the correct target when given an option of two or several targets to choose from? This would produce a yes/no score based on correct matching.

I had hoped we could do some more targets together to collect our own remote viewing portfolio target pool right here, as there is no point in me bringing in any unverified session reports from the past which only count as anecdotal anyway. This way also members of this group who are participating can see examples of their own with targets they have themselves tasked and been in control over.

Matt
Posts: 976
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:50 pm

Re: Remote viewing targets

Post by Matt »

Hi Anita,

No I won't be participating in such a protocol. Your scatter shot reports and absurdly generous subjective self grading are a recipe exploiting the texas sharpshooter fallacy. It defies any form of objective statistical analysis. I won't add credibility to it.

Perhaps look at the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganzfeld_experiment and the associated criticisms for an example of how you might go about a sensible test of remote viewing.

Matt Hardy

User avatar
VisionFromFeeling
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:21 pm

Re: Remote viewing targets

Post by VisionFromFeeling »

Matt wrote:
Wed Aug 21, 2019 5:33 pm
Hi Anita,
No I won't be participating in such a protocol. Your scatter shot reports and absurdly generous subjective self grading are a recipe exploiting the texas sharpshooter fallacy. It defies any form of objective statistical analysis. I won't add credibility to it.
Perhaps look at the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganzfeld_experiment and the associated criticisms for an example of how you might go about a sensible test of remote viewing.
Matt Hardy
Thank you for the link to the Ganzfeld experiment. I had not heard about the Ganzfeld experiment before and can now add it to my library of knowledge about paranormal research and skepticism.

However let me remind you that a "paranormal claim" is packaged as a claim of "what can you do and under what circumstances". You cannot simply refer to the Ganzfeld experiment, in that it shows a vague resemblance to the remote viewing I am doing here, and declare my paranormal claim as already falsified, based on what was done under the historical case of the Ganzfeld experiment. Let me also inform you that even though I come here as a paranormal claimant, I also consider myself a skeptic and have for the past ten years, I also have some university education especially in chemistry and physics which also included a significant amount of laboratory work. I have also already previously successfully gone through the skeptical process with a claim of medical dowsing, successful in that I managed to together with skeptics arrive at a mutually agreeable test protocol, to carry out the test, and to acknowledge the results of the test. I did that once with the Independent Investigations Group IIG, and once as what they called a demonstration with the JREF, and other skeptical activities. I am not here to fool anyone woo style, I am here to fully embrace the skeptical scientific method, on remote viewing this time. But that does not include waving around the results from an entirely different paranormal claim as being somehow applicable to mine.

I read the entire page you linked to of the Ganzfeld experiment. I would agree that the tests would have been carried out under flawed conditions, which would disqualify the results in particular the positive results. The Ganzfeld tests seem to not have been carried out under solid double blind conditions, there were also problems with randomization, and perhaps most appalling of all, a person who may have been vested in obtaining a positive result and who seems to have known the right answer, was in the same room with the judge whose task it was to match a report to one of several target options and may have even been seen pushing the judge toward the correct selection.

There are several differences between my remote viewing and how I claim to have it performed and tested, to the Ganzfeld claim and testing. For one my remote viewing sessions are all carried out under fully double blind conditions. A target can be prepared by a person who is entirely unknown to me, in a separate location, and we are to not have any contact before or during the test. No one who is in my vicinity would know the target identity. And if there is a judging matching assignment (done by someone else not by me) then no one near the judge would know of the target identity.

We would also not have a problem of randomization. Targets in my test are only used once, and have never been seen by me beforehand. As for the randomization of target options that are presented to a judge, if there is a matching assignment, that would by all means only be done by a computerized proper randomization.

I do not perform remote viewing under sensory deprivation, nor with my eyes covered. I need to write and draw as I work to investigate the impressions I have from the target and to construct the target landscape. I would not simply speak that to a separate person who records it on my behalf. Also the Ganzfeld experiment relies on a person acting as a "sender", who is watching a target video or a target picture and is attempting to telepathically send it to another person acting as a "receiver" in a separate location. I am not sure whether the person who constructs a target for my remote viewing could be considered to be a "sender", but a target can be prepared ahead of time and does not need to be mentally perceived or processed by a sender at the time when I am remote viewing it.

The Ganzfeld experiment sure is interesting and a valuable case of skeptical and paranormal history, however it seems to have taken place under breach of double blind conditions. Furthermore, the paranormal claim, and its testing protocol, of the Ganzfeld experiment, has no direct application to my paranormal claim or to the protocols under which it could be tested. You simply cannot wave the Ganzfeld experiment around, expecting it to be directly applicable to my remote viewing claim or testing. You should know better than that.

User avatar
bindeweede
Site Admin
Posts: 3771
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 3:45 pm
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

Re: Remote viewing targets

Post by bindeweede »

For those still interested in Anita's claims, here is a thread from the old JREF, dating from over 10 years ago, and some 32 pages in length. Medals for persistence for those who follow it through.
I experience a richer world of perception than do most. When I look at a page of physics equations, it comes to life in my mind, not as rows of variables but as shapes, colors, patterns and vibrational aspects, that interact on their own in my mind to show the results of their interaction, that I then translate back into physical significance. When I look at the abbreviated letters of chemical elements, they are not just letters, they are color, shape, and vibration. And when I look at human bodies, I perceive vibrational information, that translates on its own in my mind into images of human tissue, felt perception of pain or discomfort, heartbeat, swallowing or breathing. I can look at a flower from inside a car and perceive its scent to a most wonderful extent, even flowers that we don't smell with our noses. I walk by the aisles at a store and can look at the foods and perceive what they taste like. It is a wonderful and rich experience and perception of the world. It does nothing to harm me, or others. I have the ordinary perception as well, and can distinguish between the two. It does not interfere with my understanding of the world otherwise, as a very dull and boring place as seen by others. And I conclude my perceptions to be subjective to me, knowing that others don't see or feel what I do, as opposed to immediately assuming them to be reality-based or "extrasensory" - with the possible exception of the medical perceptions which have shown some compelling correlation.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/fo ... ita+ikonen

chaggle
Posts: 2584
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:01 am

Re: Remote viewing targets

Post by chaggle »

Feedback
1275-1934
created August 18 2019 at 2:59 PM BST

Image

https://imagez.tmz.com/image/dd/4by3/20 ... 6a8_md.jpg
Don't blame me - I voted remain :con

Post Reply